United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
L. GRAHAM JUDGE
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
McCann King United States Magistrate Judge
Ja 'Mical L. Betts previously pleaded not guilty to an
Indictment charging him with conspiracy to commit
Hobbs Act robberies in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951
(Count 1); two counts of Hobbs Act robbery in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 1951, 2 (Counts 14, 16); and two counts
of possession with intent to distribute a substance
containing a detectable amount of oxycodone in violation of
21 U.S.C. § 846 and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Counts 15, 17).
Indictment, ECF No. 3. The United States of America
and defendant thereafter entered into a plea agreement,
executed pursuant to the provisions of Rule 11(c)(1)(A) of
the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, whereby defendant
agreed to enter a plea of guilty to Counts 14, 15, 16, and
On August 13, 2019, defendant, accompanied by his counsel,
appeared for a change of plea proceeding. Defendant
consented, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(3), to enter a
guilty plea before a Magistrate Judge. See United States
v. Cukaj, 2001 WL 1587410 at *1 (6th Cir.
2001)(Magistrate Judge may accept a guilty plea with the
express consent of the defendant and where no objection to
the report and recommendation is filed).
the plea proceeding, the undersigned observed the appearance
and responsiveness of defendant in answering questions. Based
on that observation, the undersigned is satisfied that, at
the time he entered his guilty plea, defendant was in full
possession of his faculties, was not suffering from any
apparent physical or mental illness and was not under the
influence of narcotics, drugs or alcohol.
to accepting defendant's plea, the undersigned addressed
defendant personally and in open court and determined his
competence to plead. Based on the observations of the
undersigned, defendant understands the nature and meaning of
the charges against him in the Indictment and the
consequences of his plea of guilty to Counts 14, 15, 16, and
17. Defendant was also addressed personally and in open court
and advised of each of the rights referred to in Rule 11 of
the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
engaged in the colloquy required by Rule 11, the Court
concludes that defendant's plea is voluntary. Defendant
acknowledged that the Plea Agreement signed by him,
his attorney and the attorney for the United States and filed
on June 18, 2019, represents the only promises made by anyone
regarding the charges against him in the Indictment.
Defendant was advised that the District Judge may accept or
reject the Plea Agreement and that, even if the
Court refuses to accept any provision of the Plea
Agreement not binding on the Court, defendant may
nevertheless not withdraw his guilty plea.
confirmed the accuracy of the statement of facts supporting
the charge, which is attached to the Plea Agreement.
He confirmed that he is pleading guilty to Counts 14, 15, 16,
and 17 of the Indictment because he is in fact
guilty of those offenses. The Court concludes that
there is a factual basis for the plea.
Court concludes that defendant's plea of guilty to Counts
14, 15, 16, and 17 of the Indictment is knowingly
and voluntarily made with understanding of the nature and
meaning of the charges and of the consequences of the plea.
therefore RECOMMENDED that defendant's
guilty plea to Counts 14, 15, 16, and 17 of the
Indictment be accepted. Decision on acceptance or
rejection of the plea agreement was deferred for
consideration by the District Judge after the preparation of
a presentence investigation report.
accordance with S.D. Ohio Crim. R. 32.1, and as expressly
agreed to by defendant through counsel, a written presentence
investigation report will be prepared by the United States
Probation Office. Defendant will be asked to provide
information; defendant's attorney may be present if
defendant so wishes. Objections to the presentence report
must be made in accordance with the rules of this Court.
party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report
and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14)
days, file and serve on all parties objections to the
Report and Recommendation, specifically designating
this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof
in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28
U.S.C. §636(b)(1); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to
objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy thereof. F.R. Civ. P. 72(b).
parties are specifically advised that failure to object to
the Report and Recommendation will result in a
waiver of the right to de novo review by the
District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the
District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation.
See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v.
Detroit Federation of Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d
1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).